Is Kyrgios Taking Tennis To New Zenith?

Nick Kyrgios, who just decimated the Brisbane field, to win his first ATP title in two years with a straight set final win vs Ryan Harrison, holds a very rare, most impressive distinction in his career.

Kyrgios is the only man in history to beat prime Federer, Nadal and Djokovic the first time he played each. That is an incredible achievement and most likely a feat that will never be matched. Lleyton Hewitt is the only other player to beat Fed, Rafa and Djokovic the first time he tried but Hewitt’s version of the “hat trick” is misleading because neither of the super troika were at their prime best at the time.

This monumentally rare accomplishment is further proof of how extraordinary and devastating Kyrgios is – when he’s playing his best.

With his lethal arsenal of weaponry – the serve, the slap shot forehand, the punishing backhand, the easy hefty power, the uncanny volleying, the creativity in different forms such as the use of the Fed Saber – Kyrgios is a tennis wrecking machine.

At his best, you have to wonder of Kyrgios could beat any player from history? Well, why couldn’t he? He has shown he can beat prime Fed, Rafa and Nadal in his very first opportunities.

Of course, we know Kyrgios when not focused or disinterested could lose to any grinder or journeyman, out on court seven at eleven o’clock in the morning.

But it’s reasonably plausible that Kyrgios, on center court in a showcase night match, could inflict on Laver, Lendl, McEnroe, Agassi, Sampras, Tilden, Connors, the exact same thing he did to Fed, Rafa and Djokovic the first time he played each.

So one has to wonder: Is it possible that this super-talented enigma with the flamboyant game and persona, when operating at his very best, is actually playing the highest level of tennis we have ever witnessed?

62 comments

I'm not making a judgement either way, Moxie (about longevity). And I said "almost different sports" not "separate sports." A subtle but crucial difference.

Let's be honest: the men's game is played on a much higher level. I don't know if I agree with John McEnroe, but he said that the top 500 ATP players could beat Serena Williams, probably the best woman player ever. I say this not to put down the women, but to emphasize that the higher level involves different dynamics – of power, speed, strength, etc, all of which are impacted by aging in different ways.

In other words, we can't really compare things like longevity or prime age ranges because of the different dynamics that the male/female and level involve.

Click to expand…

Let's be honest: the men's game is being played at a much higher level right now. That has not always been the case. And even if you can't be bothered to compare their games, Serena, surely, is a stunning champion. I've already told you why longevity in the women's game is actually dicier, and so should be more highly praised. I don't know any male player that has taken maternity leave, or had problems coming back after having children. The men and women play very often in parallel, and it's incredibly condescending of you to act as if the women's game is a unicorn to the men's lion. Plenty of women have distinguished themselves, irrespective of gender, and plenty of women have propped up the game with their marquee names, across the years.

Oh please, Moxie – you're reading something into what I'm saying that I'm not actually saying. I don't want to be your stand-in for whatever you need to work out. The lion/unicorn thing is just pure rubbish – or rather, I am saying nothing of the kind.

And never did I say that Serena isn't a stunning champion. Nor did I make any comment on whether longevity is more or less impressive in the women's or men's games. I think that would require more data points than the one you offer.

As for the history of the sport, I don't know if the game's were closer in level at some point in the past – I've never researched that. That would be hard to quantify. As far as I know, other than the Battle of the Sexes matches, we don't have much to go on – and those hardly support your statement. (That said, the men's game before the Open Era was much less power oriented, so I could see the gap being closer).

Back to Kyrgios, after watching the highlights of his win against Grigor, any softening I was having towards @mrzz's view has hardened again…the dude looked nasty, with some just crazy shots. I think that is what impresses me the most: he's able to come up with some amazing shots. On one hand this looks like Monfilsian luck, on the other hand this is the type of playing that the greats are capable of.

Have to say I'm not one bit impressed with Kyrgios in those highlights. Way too much puke making pushing. Lame pushes into the court and then just stands there as the ball flies past him. Massive serve but he won't win any big titles being a pusher. Movement looked well dodgy there and I reckon he'll be gone by round 3 at the absolute best in the AO.

And we don't even know for sure if the Riggs vs King match was on the level. But we do know that Braasch whooped both Serena and Venus. And we know Serena has been avoiding a match with McEnroe. I am going to ask Serena about the possibility of playing McEnroe in Miami. Might ask Maria too if she would be willing to step in if Serena opts out.

Front244; Nick loves to pretend he's hurt. He did it in his first match at Brisbane but won the title. I think he's playing possum this week and will be running on all cylinders next week. Though he may feign like he's injured I think it will be a phantom.